January 29, 2008

SOTU and the Pew Survey


Earlier this week the Pew Research Center released the results of a survey which asked Republicans and Democrats to list the top priorities for both President Bush and Congress in the coming year. More than a quarter of Americans (27%) say this year's State of the Union address is less important than those in the past but a solid majority of 56% agreed that the president's focus should be on domestic policy. pew_chart.jpg

Apparently, someone on the President's speechwriting team was aware of the survey results. In his State of the Union speech, Bush addressed 18 of the 21 issues considered to be a "top priority." Listed below are the issues, the percentage of Republicans and Democrats that considered it a "top priority", and the section of the SOTU speech that most closely matches the topic.

Defending the U.S. against terrorism (86%--74%)

"Since September 11, we have taken the fight to these terrorists and extremists. We will stay on the offense, we will keep up the pressure, and we will deliver justice to the enemies of America.

We are engaged in the defining ideological struggle of the 21st century. The terrorists oppose every principle of humanity and decency that we hold dear. Yet in this war on terror, there is one thing we and our enemies agree on: In the long run, men and women who are free to determine their own destinies will reject terror and refuse to live in tyranny. That is why the terrorists are fighting to deny this choice to people in Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the Palestinian Territories. And that is why, for the security of America and the peace of the world, we are spreading the hope of freedom. […]

On the homefront, we will continue to take every lawful and effective measure to protect our country. This is our most solemn duty. We are grateful that there has not been another attack on our soil since September 11. This is not for a lack of desire or effort on the part of the enemy. In the past 6 years, we have stopped numerous attacks, including a plot to fly a plane into the tallest building in Los Angeles and another to blow up passenger jets bound for America over the Atlantic. Dedicated men and women in our Government toil day and night to stop the terrorists from carrying out their plans. These good citizens are saving American lives, and everyone in this chamber owes them our thanks. And we owe them something more: We owe them the tools they need to keep our people safe."

One of the most important tools we can give them is the ability to monitor terrorist communications. To protect America, we need to know who the terrorists are talking to, what they are saying, and what they are planning. Last year, the Congress passed legislation to help us do that. Unfortunately, the Congress set the legislation to expire on February 1. This means that if you do not act by Friday, our ability to track terrorist threats would be weakened and our citizens will be in greater danger. The Congress must ensure the flow of vital intelligence is not disrupted. The Congress must pass liability protection for companies believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend America. We have had ample time for debate. The time to act is now.

Protecting our Nation from the dangers of a new century requires more than good intelligence and a strong military. It also requires changing the conditions that breed resentment and allow extremists to prey on despair. So America is using its influence to build a freer, more hopeful, and more compassionate world. This is a reflection of our national interest and the calling of our conscience.

Strengthening nation's economy (76%--76%)

In the long run, Americans can be confident about our economic growth. But in the short run, we can all see that growth is slowing. So last week, my Administration reached agreement with Speaker Pelosi and Republican Leader Boehner on a robust growth package that includes tax relief for individuals and families and incentives for business investment. The temptation will be to load up the bill. That would delay it or derail it, and neither option is acceptable. This is a good agreement that will keep our economy growing and our people working. And this Congress must pass it as soon as possible.

Strengthening the military (62%--37%)

This progress is a credit to the valor of our troops and the brilliance of their commanders. This evening, I want to speak directly to our men and women on the frontlines. Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen: In the past year, you have done everything we have asked of you, and more. Our Nation is grateful for your courage. We are proud of your accomplishments. And tonight in this hallowed chamber, with the American people as our witness, we make you a solemn pledge: In the fight ahead, you will have all you need to protect our Nation. And I ask the Congress to meet its responsibilities to these brave men and women by fully funding our troops. […]

Over the past 7 years, we have increased funding for veterans by more than 95 percent. As we increase funding, we must also reform our veterans system to meet the needs of a new war and a new generation. I call on the Congress to enact the reforms recommended by Senator Bob Dole and Secretary Donna Shalala, so we can improve the system of care for our wounded warriors and help them build lives of hope, promise, and dignity.

Our military families also sacrifice for America. They endure sleepless nights and the daily struggle of providing for children while a loved one is serving far from home. We have a responsibility to provide for them. So I ask you to join me in expanding their access to childcare, creating new hiring preferences for military spouses across the Federal Government, and allowing our troops to transfer their unused education benefits to their spouses or children. Our military families serve our Nation, they inspire our Nation, and tonight our Nation honors them.

Securing Social Security (60%--70%)
Securing Medicare (47%--66%)

Every Member in this chamber knows that spending on entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is growing faster than we can afford. And we all know the painful choices ahead if America stays on this path: massive tax increases, sudden and drastic cuts in benefits, or crippling deficits. I have laid out proposals to reform these programs. Now I ask Members of Congress to offer your proposals and come up with a bipartisan solution to save these vital programs for our children and grandchildren.

Improving educational system (54%--72%)

On education, we must trust students to learn if given the chance and empower parents to demand results from our schools. In neighborhoods across our country, there are boys and girls with dreams -- and a decent education is their only hope of achieving them. Six years ago, we came together to pass the No Child Left Behind Act, and today no one can deny its results. Last year, fourth and eighth graders achieved the highest math scores on record. Reading scores are on the rise. And African-American and Hispanic students posted all-time highs. Now we must work together to increase accountability, add flexibility for States and districts, reduce the number of high school dropouts, and provide extra help for struggling schools. Members of Congress: The No Child Left Behind Act is a bipartisan achievement. It is succeeding. And we owe it to America's children, their parents, and their teachers to strengthen this good law.

We must also do more to help children when their schools do not measure up. Thanks to the D.C. Opportunity Scholarships you approved, more than 2,600 of the poorest children in our Nation's capital have found new hope at a faith-based or other non-public school. Sadly, these schools are disappearing at an alarming rate in many of America's inner cities. So I will convene a White House summit aimed at strengthening these lifelines of learning. And to open the doors of these schools to more children, I ask you to support a new $300 million program called Pell Grants for Kids. We have seen how Pell Grants help low-income college students realize their full potential. Together, we have expanded the size and reach of these grants. Now let's apply that same spirit to help liberate poor children trapped in failing public schools.

Reducing health care costs (53%--81%)

The Congress must also expand health savings accounts, create Association Health Plans for small businesses, promote health information technology, and confront the epidemic of junk medical lawsuits. With all these steps, we will help ensure that decisions about your medical care are made in the privacy of your doctor's office -- not in the halls of Congress.

Reducing budget deficit (52%--64%)

Just as we trust Americans with their own money, we need to earn their trust by spending their tax dollars wisely. Next week, I will send you a budget that terminates or substantially reduces 151 wasteful or bloated programs totaling more than $18 billion. And this budget will keep America on track for a surplus in 2012. American families have to balance their budgets, and so should their Government.

Dealing with the issue of illegal immigration (64%--43%)

The other pressing challenge is immigration. America needs to secure our borders -- and with your help, my Administration is taking steps to do so. We are increasing worksite enforcement, we are deploying fences and advanced technologies to stop illegal crossings, we have effectively ended the policy of "catch and release" at the border, and by the end of this year, we will have doubled the number of border patrol agents. Yet we also need to acknowledge that we will never fully secure our border until we create a lawful way for foreign workers to come here and support our economy. This will take pressure off the border and allow law enforcement to concentrate on those who mean us harm. We must also find a sensible and humane way to deal with people here illegally. Illegal immigration is complicated, but it can be resolved. And it must be resolved in a way that upholds both our laws and our highest ideals.

Dealing with energy problems (53%--59%)

To build a future of energy security, we must trust in the creative genius of American researchers and entrepreneurs and empower them to pioneer a new generation of clean energy technology. Our security, our prosperity, and our environment all require reducing our dependence on oil. Last year, I asked you to pass legislation to reduce oil consumption over the next decade, and you responded. Together we should take the next steps: Let us fund new technologies that can generate coal power while capturing carbon emissions. Let us increase the use of renewable power and emissions-free nuclear power. Let us continue investing in advanced battery technology and renewable fuels to power the cars and trucks of the future. Let us create a new international clean technology fund, which will help developing nations like India and China make greater use of clean energy sources. And let us complete an international agreement that has the potential to slow, stop, and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse gases. This agreement will be effective only if it includes commitments by every major economy and gives none a free ride. The United States is committed to strengthening our energy security and confronting global climate change. And the best way to meet these goals is for America to continue leading the way toward the development of cleaner and more efficient technology.

Dealing with moral breakdown (51%--44%)

[Nothing in the SOTU address on this topic.]

Reducing crime (49%--62%)

[Nothing in the SOTU address on this topic.]

Reducing middle class taxes. (46%--50%)

…tax relief for individuals and families and incentives for business investment.

Making tax cuts permanent (44%--37%)

We have other work to do on taxes. Unless the Congress acts, most of the tax relief we have delivered over the past 7 years will be taken away. Some in Washington argue that letting tax relief expire is not a tax increase. Try explaining that to 116 million American taxpayers who would see their taxes rise by an average of $1,800. Others have said they would personally be happy to pay higher taxes. I welcome their enthusiasm, and I am pleased to report that the IRS accepts both checks and money orders.

Most Americans think their taxes are high enough. With all the other pressures on their finances, American families should not have to worry about the Federal Government taking a bigger bite out of their paychecks. There is only one way to eliminate this uncertainty: make the tax relief permanent. And Members of Congress should know: If any bill raising taxes reaches my desk, I will veto it.

Reducing influence of lobbyists (42%--36%)

[Nothing in the SOTU address on this topic.]

Improving job situation (43%--76%)

America has added jobs for a record 52 straight months, but jobs are now growing at a slower pace.

Protecting the environment (39%--67%)

Our security, our prosperity, and our environment all require reducing our dependence on oil. Last year, I asked you to pass legislation to reduce oil consumption over the next decade, and you responded. Together we should take the next steps: Let us fund new technologies that can generate coal power while capturing carbon emissions. Let us increase the use of renewable power and emissions-free nuclear power. Let us continue investing in advanced battery technology and renewable fuels to power the cars and trucks of the future. Let us create a new international clean technology fund, which will help developing nations like India and China make greater use of clean energy sources. And let us complete an international agreement that has the potential to slow, stop, and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse gases.

Dealing with global trade (37%--37%)

On trade, we must trust American workers to compete with anyone in the world and empower them by opening up new markets overseas. Today, our economic growth increasingly depends on our ability to sell American goods, crops, and services all over the world. So we are working to break down barriers to trade and investment wherever we can. We are working for a successful Doha round of trade talks, and we must complete a good agreement this year. At the same time, we are pursuing opportunities to open up new markets by passing free trade agreements.

I thank the Congress for approving a good agreement with Peru. Now I ask you to approve agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. Many products from these nations now enter America duty-free, yet many of our products face steep tariffs in their markets. These agreements will level the playing field. They will give us better access to nearly 100 million customers. And they will support good jobs for the finest workers in the world: those whose products say "Made in the USA."

These agreements also promote America's strategic interests. The first agreement that will come before you is with Colombia, a friend of America that is confronting violence and terror and fighting drug traffickers. If we fail to pass this agreement, we will embolden the purveyors of false populism in our hemisphere. So we must come together, pass this agreement, and show our neighbors in the region that democracy leads to a better life.

Trade brings better jobs, better choices, and better prices. Yet for some Americans, trade can mean losing a job, and the Federal Government has a responsibility to help. I ask the Congress to reauthorize and reform trade adjustment assistance, so we can help these displaced workers learn new skills and find new jobs.

Dealing with problems of the poor (34%--62%)

In communities across our land, we must trust in the good heart of the American people and empower them to serve their neighbors in need. Over the past 7 years, more of our fellow citizens have discovered that the pursuit of happiness leads to the path of service. Americans have volunteered in record numbers. Charitable donations are higher than ever. Faith-based groups are bringing hope to pockets of despair, with newfound support from the Federal Government. And to help guarantee equal treatment for faith-based organizations when they compete for Federal funds, I ask you to permanently extend Charitable Choice.

Tonight the armies of compassion continue the march to a new day in the Gulf Coast. America honors the strength and resilience of the people of this region. We reaffirm our pledge to help them build stronger and better than before. And tonight I am pleased to announce that in April we will host this year's North American Summit of Canada, Mexico, and the United States in the great city of New Orleans. […]

America is leading the fight against global poverty, with strong education initiatives and humanitarian assistance. We have also changed the way we deliver aid by launching the Millennium Challenge Account. This program strengthens democracy, transparency, and the rule of law in developing nations, and I ask you to fully fund this important initiative.

America is leading the fight against global hunger. Today, more than half the world's food aid comes from the United States. And tonight, I ask the Congress to support an innovative proposal to provide food assistance by purchasing crops directly from farmers in the developing world, so we can build up local agriculture and help break the cycle of famine.

Providing insurance to the uninsured (27%--65%)

So I have proposed ending the bias in the tax code against those who do not get their health insurance through their employer. This one reform would put private coverage within reach for millions, and I call on the Congress to pass it this year.

Dealing with global warming (12%--47%)

Let us create a new international clean technology fund, which will help developing nations like India and China make greater use of clean energy sources. And let us complete an international agreement that has the potential to slow, stop, and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse gases. This agreement will be effective only if it includes commitments by every major economy and gives none a free ride. The United States is committed to strengthening our energy security and confronting global climate change.
trackbacks and bookmarks

bookmark this post:
send a trackback for this entry:
http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4155


comments
Alex Chediak writes:

1

Joe,

FOX did a focus group survey consisting of equal numbers of Reps and Dems. Based on initial reaction, it looks like there was strong bi-partisan support for the speech.

posted on 01.28.2008 11:31 PM
tgirsch writes:

2

Last year, the Congress passed legislation to help us do that. Unfortunately, the Congress set the legislation to expire on February 1. This means that if you do not act by Friday, our ability to track terrorist threats would be weakened and our citizens will be in greater danger. The Congress must ensure the flow of vital intelligence is not disrupted. The Congress must pass liability protection for companies believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend America. We have had ample time for debate. The time to act is now.

This could not be more wrong. Those companies broke the law, and violated constitutional rights, plain and simple. If we grant retroactive immunity to them, we're sending a message that any future administration can simply outsource constitutional violations. The government can't do an unreasonable search without a warrant, so they get AT&T to do it for them. No, thanks.

In any case, there's simply no evidence that the president's illegal wiretapping scheme provided any useful information or prevented any attacks; and indeed, there's evidence to the contrary. Intelligence agencies are so bogged down with useless information, they can no longer separate the wheat from the chaff.

Call me naive, but I refuse to believe that protecting the nation from terrorists has to involve throwing the Bill of Rights under a bus. And I refuse to believe that requiring oversight -- in our long tradition of checks and balances -- somehow dooms us to further terrorist triumphs.

You're above this, Joe. Or, at least, you should be.

posted on 01.29.2008 12:44 PM
JohnW writes:

3

We certainly are in the "defining ideological struggle of the 21st century". It's for democracy and freedom-In America.

posted on 01.29.2008 12:52 PM
Joe Carter writes:

4


You're above this, Joe. Or, at least, you should be.

Dude, those are Bush's words, not mine. I simply cut and pasted that from the speech.

posted on 01.29.2008 1:35 PM
JohnW writes:

5

Re No. 4,

Joe, perhaps you have an opinion you could share with us on Bush's comments concerning "Defending the U.S. against terrorism" and telecom immunity?

Is all this warrantless spying on our emails and phone calls necessary and constitutional?

What do you think?

posted on 01.29.2008 1:48 PM
ex-preacher writes:

6

At this point, I don't think anyone, Democrat or Republican, cares what Bush says about anything. Bush himself seems to be on auto-pilot, focusing what little attention he can muster to his legacy, not any initiatives. He has discovered a sudden distaste for earmarks after looking the other way when Republicans ran Congress for six years.

Hey, Joe, it looks like your boss hasn't bought in to your one-legged stool theory.

From onenewsnow.com

- - - - -

Tony Perkins, a powerful evangelical conservative activist, says although the Republican presidential race continues to remain fluid, the "winning message" for the GOP is coming into clear focus.

The Family Research Council president also states that the Republican presidential contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, and Michigan have proven that the coalition consisting of social, defense, and economic conservatives is indispensable to the party. Perkins likens the coalition to a three-legged stool with Iowa winner Mike Huckabee representing the social leg, New Hampshire and South Carolina winner Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) the defense leg, and Michigan and Nevada victor Mitt Romney the economic leg.

"What's required is bringing those three together ... and I think we're seeing this," he continues. "We're moving closer to embracing all three of the components of the conservative coalition. Fiscal conservatism, defense conservatism, and social conservatism."

Perkins says it is "a very real probability" that the Republicans will go into their convention in September not knowing who their nominee will be.


posted on 01.29.2008 1:48 PM
tgirsch writes:

7

Joe:

Chalk it up to your misleading use of an end quote. The three paragraphs prior to what I cited were encased in quotes, and the one I cited was not. I didn't see the speech, and presumed (incorrectly) that this indicated where your citation ended and your commentary began.

Sorry for the confusion. But like JohnW, I would like to hear where you stand.

posted on 01.29.2008 2:02 PM
ucfengr writes:

8

Is all this warrantless spying on our emails and phone calls necessary and constitutional?

I am not sure I accept the premise that government is or is even capable of actually reading all e-mails and listening to all our phone calls. Every day there are a billion or more telephone calls and another several billion e-mails in the US alone. Let's look at that for a moment. Let's assume that there are one billion phone calls and one billion e-mails each day in the US (I imagine the number is much higher). Let's further assume that each phone call lasts one minute and each e-mail can be read in one minute (I think the real number would be much higher in this case too). If you run the numbers, it looks like you would need roughly 139,000 people working 24 hours a day (roughly 420,000 man-years!) to read each days e-mail and phone traffic. If you assume GS-7's doing the work at about $70k per year (includes salary, benefits, management overhead, etc), the Feds would be paying roughly $29.4B per year just reading e-mails and listening to phone calls, even using my wildly optimistic assumptions, and that's just the US. Sounds pretty far fetched to me.

So I guess my response would be, what do you actually mean by your question, because it is clearly not plausible that the federal government is spying on all our phone calls and e-mails?

posted on 01.29.2008 6:14 PM
oclarki writes:

9

ucfengr,

Actually it is possible. Read up on the program known as Carnivore. A program that wasn't started by George W. Bush, incidently. It's pretty amazing technology. It uses computer algorithims to scan for words and phrases with the text or spoken communication and then flags them. This coupled with more software that analyzes the networks of people you communicate with enables the US government to seperate the wheat from the chaff. That's why a middle aged lady calling her sister about the movie she watched where a plane was hijacked and flown into a building, wouldn't be flagged. Someone calling Pakistan to talk about it would be.
It's my understanding that the surveillence only concerns phone calls outside the US, but since so many calls and email traffic are routed through the US they want to be able to look at those as well.

Will tgrish stick up for my constitutional rights when I don't want to take the mark of the beast that Hillary intends to use to ensure we can access our primary care physician?

posted on 01.29.2008 6:42 PM
ucfengr writes:

10

Actually it is possible. Read up on the program known as Carnivore. A program that wasn't started by George W. Bush, incidently. It's pretty amazing technology. It uses computer algorithims to scan for words and phrases with the text or spoken communication and then flags them...

I am familiar with the program, but as you say, it predates GWB, so that can't be what they are talking about.

posted on 01.29.2008 6:51 PM
JohnW writes:

11

Oclarki,

Did you hear about Hillary displaying an American flag with the stars turned the wrong way at one of her rallys? The way the stars where turned was supposed to symbolize a satanic pentagram.

I been checking out books by Noam Chomsky at the library-certainly the feds are on to me now...I'll be on that list soon....

posted on 01.29.2008 6:51 PM
oclarki writes:

12

JohnW,

Did you hear about Hillary displaying an American flag with the stars turned the wrong way at one of her rallys? The way the stars where turned was supposed to symbolize a satanic pentagram.


People who believe that sort of stuff are as emotionally immature about their political opponents as those who believe we invaded Iraq to steal their oil and enrich certain companies. Silly, unserious people, all.

posted on 01.30.2008 1:19 PM
JohnW writes:

13

Clever retort, but not true.

It's very plausible that we invaded Iraq to steal their oil and enrich certain companies. We now have greater access to Iraqi oil and many companies have made huge profits. You may want to do a little research into the Iraqi oil law and contractor fraud.

posted on 01.30.2008 2:10 PM
oclarki writes:

14

JohnW,

Sure, just like it's possible that Hillary purposely displayed the flag in such a way that it became a symbol of Satan. Ever hear of Occam's Razor? Or Napolean, "Never ascribe to evil that which can be explained by incompetence"

posted on 01.30.2008 2:49 PM
ucfengr writes:

15

It's very plausible that we invaded Iraq to steal their oil and enrich certain companies.

No, it's really not plausible at all.

posted on 01.30.2008 5:20 PM
JohnW writes:

16

Sure it's plausible.

Ucengre,

The stated reasons for invading and occupying Iraq were: concerns about Saddam's ties with terrorists (hinting he was involved in 911), Iraq being a grave threat to our security because of it's WMD and nuclear programs, liberating the Iraqi people from a evil tyrant, and spreading democracy.

Do these still seem plausible to you given the history of the last 5 years?

I'd say money and access to the oil are more realistic explanations.

posted on 01.30.2008 6:49 PM
ucfengr writes:

17

I'd say money and access to the oil are more realistic explanations.

Of course you would, but that's because you're nuts, not because your theory is plausible.

posted on 01.30.2008 7:18 PM
JohnW writes:

18

Ucfengr,

Name calling is all you got on the topic?

posted on 01.30.2008 8:10 PM
ucfengr writes:

19

Name calling is all you got on the topic?

I'm serious when the situation warrants it; your assertion doesn't.

posted on 01.30.2008 9:07 PM
JohnW writes:

20

Peak oil theory is not plausible either, right?

posted on 01.31.2008 10:08 AM
oclarki writes:

21

JohnW,

What does peak oil have to do with it? Why would the US allow Iraqi oil to be sold on the open market if we wanted to steal it?

posted on 01.31.2008 1:27 PM
JohnW writes:

22

Oclarki,

We let them sell the oil, so we can share in the profits.

It is plausible that Peak oil has something to do with the invasion/occupation of Iraq. If oil supplies are going to become scarce, it would be in our strategic interests to control the oil in order to have it for ourselves. Another theory is we just want to be able to control the oil markets.

Check out these documents.
www.judicialwatch.org/iraqi-oilfield-pr.shtml

posted on 01.31.2008 2:13 PM
oclarki writes:

23

Spending billions on reconstruction, and military operations in Iraq seems like a pretty round about way of sharing the profits from the sale of Iraqi oil.

We control the oil markets???? Why did OPEC refuse to increase production today?

I looked at your link. I have to question how you can read that and then leap to the conclusion that because we mapped the oil fields, terminals and production facilities of Iraq prior to the war we were planning on stealing the oil. Don't you think when planning an invasion that the costs were going to be partly offset by Iraqi oil production it would be important to know where everything was so we could cpature and safeguard them before Saddam torched them? Weren't some of the earliest operations of the war aimed at seizing key oil fields and terminals to prevent them from being destroyed?
The article said Saudi Arabian & UAE Oil Facilities were profiled as well. Does that mean we are planning on stealing their oil next?

posted on 01.31.2008 3:12 PM
JohnW writes:

24

Oclarki,

Why did we go over there and invade and occupy Iraq?

Don't you think it would be in America's strategic interests to control a country with such prime oil reserves prior to an upcoming shortage?

The link was not meant to be proof.

To say the issue of our country's future oil supplies had absolutely nothing to do with our war on Iraq is amazing. At the very least you could say that having a friendly democratic regime in power in Iraq with it's vast oil reserves would be favorable to our future stragegic interests.

posted on 01.31.2008 4:11 PM
oclarki writes:

25

JohnW,

There is a world of difference between securing access to oil supplies that will be sold on the open market and stealing them for ourselves. Were we stealing the oil from Kuwait when we reflagged tankers in the Strait of Hormuz?

posted on 01.31.2008 4:19 PM
JohnW writes:

26

tgirsch,

Apparently, Joe does not have an opinion he can share with us on Bush's State of the Union comments concerning "Defending the U.S. against terrorism" and telecom immunity.

More likely though, he knows our Unitary Executive is violating the constitution and the FISA laws, but he can't say this. He spoke out against torture on this blog and got burned for it. Deep in his heart he knows Bush should be impeached, but he could never say this.

posted on 02.02.2008 10:31 AM
post a comment
comment








remember personal info?






email this link
email this entry to:


your email address:


message (optional):